In The Passionate Teacher, Ron Fried describes the Game of School (GOS) as what happens when teachers and students forsake intellectual work and instead engage in their classes as rituals. Take this opportunity to consider this chapter in light of some of the the other experiences that you've had this semester. What elements of the game of school are you seeing in your placements? How have you seen teachers fight the game of school in their classes? What similarities, if any, did you see between the descriptions of American classes in the Teaching Gap and the Game of School? Finally, what impact will this description of the GOS have on your own approach to teaching as expressed in your teaching philosophy?
In both my placements I have seen both my CT "playing" the game of school and also fighting against it. A few examples of this would be the rote copying down of notes and definitions. The teacher will give the students time to copy them down and the recite them aloud verbatim. Also the use of true/false, matching, short answer questions, which are instructed to be formated in complete sentences, but the students know that if they are not they will still get credit for the correct answer, worksheets and quizzes. On the other hand, some examples of my CT fighting the game of school, include, having the metric system the only system used in the classroom. I think this is an example because especially in the U.S. we are not accustomed to using the metric system and it would be easier on the teacher to stick with the system that is easier for the student. Another example is scheduling time after school for those students who need extra help or just need reinforcement. This is something that is not required but is done because she wants the students to succeed. She also communicates with parents to discuss a students progress and whether they need to stay after for extra help. I witnessed this first hand. A student was missing a lot of assignments and also missed a test. My CT talked with the student to let him know he needed to stay after school that day to make up the test. He commented that he had practice so it would have to be another day. She then informed him that she had already spoken with his mother and they had both decided that school is more important than his practice and that he was to show up after school. This is a good example because it shows the extra steps taken by the teacher to set her students up for success and remind them what their priorities should be. Communicating with the parents also lets the students know that they can not play one against another but that both the teacher and parent are on the same team. This is not always the case where in the game of school teachers and students do the bare minimum to get by and it is obviously easier for the teacher to not give her time after class in order to help students.
The biggest similarities between the Teaching Gap and the GOS was the lecturing, note taking and rote memorization of definitions. This is really the bare minimum. It puts the information out there for students to do what they need to get by. There is no understanding, explanation, or comprehension involved. It is just let me try and remember this for the test and then dump it at the door. This shows the biggest difference between schools in the U.S. and those in Japan. Japan's educational system is focused more on ways to communicate information in away that the students understand in order for it to make its way into the long term memory, their assessments require comprehension and don't rely strictly on regurgitating information that has been memorized.
I myself am a hands on learner. I also need to understand where a concept originated from, to build this concept from the ground up understanding every step of the process. I have often found this to be extremely frustrating because most of my teachers either one could not effectively answer my questions or simply replied that it was something I did not need to know. As a teacher I can not think of anything that a student asks me as something they do not need to know. That is why they are in school, to learn, to know, to grow as individuals. I strive to become a teacher that my students can come to with any question and be able to either provide them with an answer, discover the answers to questions I do not know, or be able to guide them to somebody who can answer them. I want to stay away from just memorizing definitions and lean more towards understanding what the definition means and being able to help the students not only decode what they are reading but teach them ways that will allow them to comprehend what they are reading. I want to create my own game of school, so to speak, that is a place where not only do the students strive to learn but also the teachers. A place where there are no silly questions. A place where going through the motions applies only to walking, breathing, etc and is not synonymous with learning. It might take more effort, persistence, and will probably ruffle a few feathers, but if the education of the next generation is not worth the added effort, than nothing is!
In both my placements I have seen both my CT "playing" the game of school and also fighting against it. A few examples of this would be the rote copying down of notes and definitions. The teacher will give the students time to copy them down and the recite them aloud verbatim. Also the use of true/false, matching, short answer questions, which are instructed to be formated in complete sentences, but the students know that if they are not they will still get credit for the correct answer, worksheets and quizzes. On the other hand, some examples of my CT fighting the game of school, include, having the metric system the only system used in the classroom. I think this is an example because especially in the U.S. we are not accustomed to using the metric system and it would be easier on the teacher to stick with the system that is easier for the student. Another example is scheduling time after school for those students who need extra help or just need reinforcement. This is something that is not required but is done because she wants the students to succeed. She also communicates with parents to discuss a students progress and whether they need to stay after for extra help. I witnessed this first hand. A student was missing a lot of assignments and also missed a test. My CT talked with the student to let him know he needed to stay after school that day to make up the test. He commented that he had practice so it would have to be another day. She then informed him that she had already spoken with his mother and they had both decided that school is more important than his practice and that he was to show up after school. This is a good example because it shows the extra steps taken by the teacher to set her students up for success and remind them what their priorities should be. Communicating with the parents also lets the students know that they can not play one against another but that both the teacher and parent are on the same team. This is not always the case where in the game of school teachers and students do the bare minimum to get by and it is obviously easier for the teacher to not give her time after class in order to help students.
The biggest similarities between the Teaching Gap and the GOS was the lecturing, note taking and rote memorization of definitions. This is really the bare minimum. It puts the information out there for students to do what they need to get by. There is no understanding, explanation, or comprehension involved. It is just let me try and remember this for the test and then dump it at the door. This shows the biggest difference between schools in the U.S. and those in Japan. Japan's educational system is focused more on ways to communicate information in away that the students understand in order for it to make its way into the long term memory, their assessments require comprehension and don't rely strictly on regurgitating information that has been memorized.
I myself am a hands on learner. I also need to understand where a concept originated from, to build this concept from the ground up understanding every step of the process. I have often found this to be extremely frustrating because most of my teachers either one could not effectively answer my questions or simply replied that it was something I did not need to know. As a teacher I can not think of anything that a student asks me as something they do not need to know. That is why they are in school, to learn, to know, to grow as individuals. I strive to become a teacher that my students can come to with any question and be able to either provide them with an answer, discover the answers to questions I do not know, or be able to guide them to somebody who can answer them. I want to stay away from just memorizing definitions and lean more towards understanding what the definition means and being able to help the students not only decode what they are reading but teach them ways that will allow them to comprehend what they are reading. I want to create my own game of school, so to speak, that is a place where not only do the students strive to learn but also the teachers. A place where there are no silly questions. A place where going through the motions applies only to walking, breathing, etc and is not synonymous with learning. It might take more effort, persistence, and will probably ruffle a few feathers, but if the education of the next generation is not worth the added effort, than nothing is!